Eswatini

Published May 2025

Relevant legislation:

• Constitution of the Kingdom of Eswatini (Swaziland) 2005
• United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) 2003
• Southern African Development Community (SADC) Protocol Against Corruption
• Money Laundering Prevention Act 2001
• Serious Offences (Confiscation of Proceeds) Act 2001
• Prevention of Corruption Act 2006
• Suppression of Terrorism Act 2008

Summary

Eswatini has no substantive protection for whistleblowers. Formerly the Kingdom of Eswatini and formerly Swaziland, the country gained independence from Britain in 1968, with the first elections being held in 1972. In 1973, King Sobhuza II issued a decree repealing the 1968 Constitution, which had established a constitutional monarchy, and assumed supreme power, vesting all legislative, executive, and judicial power in himself. King Mswati III and Queen Mother Ntfombi assumed power in 1986 and continue to rule in terms of the 1973 decree.

While the 2005 Constitution does guarantee fundamental rights, it also includes provisions that allow the government to restrict or suspend these rights in certain situations, particularly in the case of criticism of the monarchy and political dissent. There is no specific limitation clause in the constitution; instead, internal limitations contained within specific provisions are employed, themselves a relic of the colonial era when fundamental rights were subservient to matters of defence and public safety and morality.

Constitutional legal principles have no practical legal application, and the current constitutional framework has several deficiencies:

• It fails to protect the rights of Freedom of Expression and Association;
• It fails to legally enforce social and economic rights, despite Eswatini being a signatory to the United Nations Convention on Civil and Political Rights;
• There is no separation of powers, unlike in other jurisdictions where there are three distinct organs of government;
• King Mswati III has total legal immunity and total legislative authority because he has the authority to unilaterally dissolve parliament;
• King Mswati III effectively has supreme executive authority and effectively controls the Judiciary.

Against this repressive background, with freedom of the press restricted and with political opposition parties being banned, it is unlikely that whistleblowers would come forward.

Whistleblower Laws and Policy

Eswatini is a signatory to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Protocol Against Corruption, and is a member of the African Union.

Currently, Eswatini does not have any whistleblower protection legislation. However, it does have laws which address corruption, fraud, and related misconduct, and has enacted other laws designed to counteract the effects of corrupt practices within public sector institutions.

The Prevention of Corruption Act No. 3 of 2006 was enacted to:

• Investigate and punish corrupt activities;
• Establish an anti-corruption commission;
• Provide for other matters incidental to the prevention of corruption.

The Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) was established within the framework of the law to coordinate all anti-corruption activities under the guidance of a National Anti-Corruption Forum. The ACC is largely an investigative agency funded by the Ministry of Justice. However, reports from anti-corruption watchdogs record the ineffectiveness of the ACC, accusing them of only pursuing politically motivated cases and serving the interests of the Prime Minister. Although the parliamentary Public Accounts Commission (PAC) was limited in its authority to apply and enforce consequences, except by drawing the public’s attention to potential corruption, it continued to pursue investigations, particularly those related to public spending.

Under the Disclosures Act, the King of Eswatini is empowered to appoint the Director and members of the Commission who serve at his request for a period of five (5) years. The Director of the ACC appoints investigators who are empowered to investigate all reports of improper conduct and corruption and, on the evidence of such, refer those matters to the Director of Public Prosecutions for decision on whether to prosecute. Under Section 13, of the Act, these investigators have the power to enter any premises for the purposes of searching and seizing evidence likely to assist in confirming claims of impropriety and to arrest implicated persons.

A drawback of the Prevention of Corruption Act is that, in Section 10(2), it offers the possibility of declining to conduct an investigation if the DPP and the investigative team are of the opinion that the disclosure is “trivial, frivolous, vexatious or not made in good faith.”

In 2012, Eswatini enacted the Swaziland Procurement Act, which sets a code of conduct for public procurement sector officials and employees. As such, the Swaziland Public Procurement Agency (SPPRA) was established in 2012 to regulate and monitor public spending and public funds.

Section 27 of the Swaziland Procurement Act prohibits suppliers from offering gifts or hospitality to any staff of the procuring entity, members of the tender board, or officials and employees of the Swaziland Public Procurement Agency. Strict penalties such as a fine of 100,000 emalangeni (about 5,400 USD) or ten years direct imprisonment are applicable upon conviction. In matters where a law enforcement official or a member of the public prosecutor’s office is convicted of bribery, the individual is liable for a fine of up to 200,000 emalangeni (about 10,800 USD).

Secrecy Laws

The principle of confidentiality and protection of journalistic privilege does not exist in terms of Eswatini law, with Eswatini and the civil society landscape characterised by continuous and ongoing repression. The Official Secrets Act prohibits any person who has been entrusted with any information from an official source or the government from disclosing such information to the prejudice of Eswatini and is liable on conviction to payment of a fine and/or five years imprisonment. This provision is one of many laws that can deter potential whistleblowers and reporters from disclosing and reporting acts of improper conduct and corruption.

Eswatini still applies a law that harks back to the colonial period: the Cape Libel Act of 1882. The Act creates a two-year term of imprisonment if convicted of defamation if anyone publishes a defamatory statement or report that is intended to “injure the reputation of a person and expose him or her to hatred, ridicule or contempt.” Such legislation is often activated to silence critics of the government and those close to the King and the royal court.

Freedom of Expression and Freedom of the Media

The Official Secrets Act and the Sedition and Subversive Activities Act (1938) are two examples of the serious impediments to freedom of the media and freedom of expression in Eswatini. Predating the 2005 Constitution, the Act contains overtly broad and vague provisions that criminalise “sedition intention” or “subversive activities” (Sections 3 and 5); in other words, uttering anything critical of the King and the government of Eswatini-including statements, speeches, or publications. Such ‘seditious’ intentions can result in up to 20 years of imprisonment upon conviction (Sections 3 and 4). Similarly, the Suppression of Terrorism Act 2008 defines a ‘terrorist act’ in a broad manner to include a wide range of conduct, purposely vague and sweeping.

Additionally, the publication of newspapers requires registration under the Books and Newspapers Act 20 of 1963, obliging the editors to be residents of Eswatini. The Swaziland Communications Commission Act 10 of 2013 established a regulatory body overseeing all communication services in the country, including postal services, broadcast media, and the internet. Now operating as the Eswatini Communications Commission, it falls under the authority of the Ministry of Information, Communication, and Technology. The Commission’s Board is appointed by the Minister in consultation with the relevant Cabinet standing committee, and many of its functions require the Minister’s approval.

In some instances, journalists have been accused of high treason for writing articles critical of the King and the monarchy, and the penalty on conviction of this crime is death. Under these circumstances, most journalists resort to self-censorship as the judiciary is closely aligned with the monarch, and there is a real risk of retaliation, including professional ostracisation. In one such case, an independent monthly magazine known for covering socio-political topics reportedly lost advertising revenue from a parastatal after it published criticism of the royal family.

Eswatini continues to ignore the Constitution’s provisions for fundamental freedoms and uses law enforcement and the courts to threaten and silence dissent. William Mkhaliphi, an elderly sugar cane farmer from Vuvulane, in north-eastern Swaziland, was arrested by police in August 2016 after he voiced concerns about alleged royal investments and land grabbing during a traditional Sibaya, convened by the King at Ludzidzini Royal Village. He was charged following spurious allegations of theft and released on bail by the Magistrates’ Court in Simunye the same month.

There are no protections afforded to the media in terms of protection of sources of information. This effectively means that only a few of the most courageous members of Eswatini society speak out against unlawful government practices and corruption.

In April 2020, an editor of the online Swati Newsweek, Eugene Dube, was interrogated for seven hours after the paper ran a story deemed to be critical of the Eswatini government’s response to the coronavirus pandemic. The police seized laptops, several mobile telephones, and notebooks in their enquiry.

In the same year, Swati Newsweek was targeted again for an interview with the leader of a new political party who had advocated for the removal of the King as absolute monarch and replacing him with a multi-party democratic system of government. This was labelled as seditious since political parties are banned in Eswatini.

In another matter, Zweli Martin Dlamini, another editor of the Swaziland News, reported in February 2020 that he received death threats from the Minister of Information, Princess Sikhanyiso, the eldest daughter of King Mswati III, after the paper ran a series of articles questioning government policies. He was subsequently arrested for sedition and tortured while in custody. Upon his release, Zweli Martin Dlamini fled to South Africa for fear of being killed for his reporting on issues of public interest, which exposed the rot of corruption in Eswatini.

There is then effectively no protection for whistleblowers in Eswatini, and no likelihood of any progressive legislation being enacted in the foreseeable future.

Shortcomings in Legislation and Possible Reforms

Eswatini has no whistleblower law, nor does it have policies and practices in place to protect such reporters from reprisals from the individuals being accused and exposed by the reporting of their corrupt practices. Such legislation must be enacted to encourage greater transparency in both the public sector and private institutions.

The Constitution must guarantee equal protection under the law, which necessarily means that the monarch must be accountable and his legal immunity revoked. This would free the judiciary to rule on matters without interference from the King and his political appointees. and open up public discourse on the destabilising effects of corruption and bribery on Eswatini’s economic, social, and political development. As for accessible reforms, the anti-corruption branch of the local police service must be equipped to receive appropriate disclosures of a serious nature that involve fraud or corruption, with the possibility of a legal advisor’s consultation.

Additionally, the ban on political parties should be lifted to enhance the right to freedom of expression and association in the country. The restrictions on press freedoms should also be lifted, allowing for the free flow of information, which has the effect of bringing greater exposure to the Eswatini public of the resources at their disposal in the fight against corruption.

Without the political will to enforce the provisions of the law and to adhere to the constitutional objectives, the fight against corruption is lost.

Knowledge, Support and Action Centres

Committee to Protect Journalists (CJP)

The Committee to Protect Journalists is an independent, nonprofit organization that promotes press freedom worldwide. We defend the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal.

• Committee to Protect Journalists, Knight Foundation Press Freedom Center, P.O. Box 2675, New York, NY 10108
• Tel: +1 212 465 1004
• Fax: +1 212 465 9568
• Website: https://cpj.org/about/

Amnesty International (Southern Africa)

Amnesty International is a global charity organisation that promotes the protection and advancement of human rights globally. Its focus is the promotion of all civil, social, political and economic rights and the observance of these by governments and state institutions and private sector.

• Address: 3 on Glenhove, Melrose Estate 2196, Johannesburg, South Africa
• Twitter: @AmnestySARO
• Tel: +27 11 283 6000